SSCP Risk Identification, Monitoring, and Analysis Practice Question
A vulnerability scan identifies a critical flaw in a web server. The server is currently in production and cannot be patched immediately due to compatibility issues. The risk response chosen is to implement a web application firewall (WAF) rule to block exploitation attempts. This is an example of which risk response?
⚠ Common exam trap
ISC2 often tests the distinction between risk mitigation and risk avoidance, where candidates mistakenly think that blocking exploitation attempts 'avoids' the risk, but avoidance requires eliminating the vulnerability entirely (e.g., removing the server), not just reducing its exploitability.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Risk mitigation
Implementing a WAF rule to block exploitation attempts reduces the likelihood or impact of the vulnerability without removing the flaw itself. This is a classic risk mitigation technique, as it applies a compensating control to lower residual risk while the server remains unpatched. Risk mitigation involves taking action to reduce risk to an acceptable level, which is exactly what deploying a WAF signature achieves.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Risk acceptance
Why it's wrong here
A WAF rule actively blocks exploitation attempts, which is risk mitigation, not acceptance; acceptance would mean documenting the flaw and proceeding unpatched. Acceptance is chosen when the impact is tolerable and no control is added.
- ✗
Risk avoidance
Why it's wrong here
Avoidance eliminates the activity or asset generating the risk, such as decommissioning the web server or removing the vulnerable service. Here the server stays in production with a compensating control, so exposure is reduced rather than removed, which is mitigation.
- ✗
Risk transfer
Why it's wrong here
A WAF rule reduces likelihood by blocking exploit traffic, which is risk mitigation, not transfer. Transfer shifts financial impact to a third party via insurance or contractual indemnity; that would be the answer if the stem described purchasing cyber-liability cover for the unpatched server.
- ✓
Risk mitigation
Why this is correct
Deploying a WAF rule reduces the likelihood or impact of exploitation while the underlying flaw remains unpatched, so the risk is lowered rather than transferred, avoided or accepted. This directly satisfies the stem's constraint that patching is blocked by production compatibility issues.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 971 original SSCP practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This SSCP practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISC2 certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the SSCP exam.